Parkinson ’ s disease. Function Anatomy of Parkinson ’ s Disease.
GradeMark for Electronic Marking and Feedback Denis Parkinson & Dr Stephen McKinnell School of...
-
Upload
tyrone-webb -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
1
Transcript of GradeMark for Electronic Marking and Feedback Denis Parkinson & Dr Stephen McKinnell School of...
GradeMark for Electronic Marking and Feedback
Denis Parkinson & Dr Stephen McKinnell
School of Health Sciences
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Overview
• Why use e-marking and feedback
• The School of Health Sciences 2013-14 pilot
• Demonstration
• Questions and Answers
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
What do we already know?• University of Glamorgan (2010) - Turn it in or Turn it off? A
Pilot Project for Turnitin and Grademark Experience.
• University of Exeter (2012) – Online Coursework Management Evaluation.
• University of Glamorgan (2012) - Assessment Diaries & Grademark.
• University of Huddersfield (2013) - Evaluating the Benefits of Electronic Assessment Management.
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Glamorgan 2010
Positives
• Convenient
• No need for hard copies
• Raises awareness of plagiarism
• Easy to use
• Confirmation of submission
• Encourages early submission
• More detailed feedback
Negatives
• Difficult to interpret Originality Reports
• Poor preview layout.
• Double work if also asked to submit hard copy.
104 students from 4 Faculties
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Exeter 2010
An indirect evaluation of student experiences (view of academic and admin staff)
• Discrepancies in the (staff) perceptions of benefits
• 45% felt feedback experience hadn’t changed
• 26% felt feedback experience had go worse
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Glamorgan 2012
Advantages
• Easy to use
• Legibility
• Student engagement with feedback
Disadvantages
• Online access
• Reading on screen
296 students – surveys and focus groups.
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Huddersfield 2013
Benefits
• Easier to submit (no travel)
• Avoids printing – printing panic
• Confident submission was received
• Legibility
• More detailed / clearer feedback
Survey (n=804) and focus groups
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Current Approach
Paper submissionsMarked
Annotated / Feedback sheets
Electronic submissions
TurnitinUK
Originality reports
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Why?
School Academic Quality and Standards Committee
University
Aware that the UoL is looking into policy/guidance
Students
Benefits?
Staff
Increased discussion
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Evaluation 23 modules in 2013-14
6 undergraduate programmes
Diagnostic Radiography, Nursing, Occupational Therapy, Orthoptics, Physiotherapy, Radiotherapy.
1 postgraduate programme
PGDip in Radiotherapy
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Evaluation
935 submissions (Sem. 1 - 439, Sem. 2 - 496)
40 members of staff
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Marking
Quick MarksIn-text annotations
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Marking
Quick MarksIn-text annotations
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Example
Details
• 4 different markers
• Random allocation of students to markers
Tools/Approach
• VITAL groups
• 4 TurnitinUK submission links
• VITAL adaptive release rules
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Feedback – Semester 1
18 June 2014
Year 1 modules
29/44 36/41 20/40 20/37 38/38
Year 2 modules
22/33 20/33 29/32 50/57 19/33 20/22
25% students have not accessed feedback
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Staff - Views This was a positive experience which I enjoyed and from the
comments from the students they also seemed positive.
Took some time to set up the specific comments needed for this assignment but once they were written it was easy to use for remaining assignments.
I enjoyed the experience. I was slow starting initially, because I was adding to the standard comments section. After the first few assignments, this section made the process much faster overall because I was tending to make similar comments on the assignments. So well worth investing the time and effort in developing the comments section initially.
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Issues One ‘lost’ submission
Be careful on the ‘TurnitinUK Assignments By Groups’ screen
School Policies
Need modifying
Financial suspension of students
MWS accounts and VITAL
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
E-Submission Guidance
Draft checking links
• Students allowed to view Originality reports
E-submission for marking links
• The only submission that will be marked
Digital receipts confirm submission
• No digital receipt – assume no submission
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
E-Submission Guidance
Single submission
• Contact Assessment Officer or Programme Secretary if a mistake has been made
• Digital receipts needed to withdraw an assignment.
• Requests to re-submit not normally considered within 2 working days of due date.
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
E-Submission Guidance
Financial Suspension
• Restrictions placed on MWS user account
• Students need to contact the Director of Studies to make alternative arrangements.
• Late or non-submission due to FS will be penalised if DoS has not been contacted
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
E-Submission Guidance
Hard Copy & e-Submissions
• Both must be made before submission deadline.
• If either comes in after the submission deadline, the date of the latest submission will be used to calculate penalty.
• If one is missing – incomplete submission and a zero mark will be awarded.
• Guidance will be given about what can be excluded from the e-submission (appendices or reference list).
• If the two submissions are different a penalty will be applied.
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Conclusions Technical environment –
okay
Fairly intuitive to use
Some national issues (slowness)
Policies
Modification
Guidance for students & staff
Students
Valued access to Originality reports
Feedback improvements
Staff
Support and training
Changes to working practice
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
Finally
School Guides
• GradeMark http://goo.gl/42wFP6
• TurnitinUKhttp://goo.gl/vuaAQt
• Multiple TurnitinUK Inboxes http://goo.gl/emDmZ9
Contacts
Steve McKinnell [email protected]
Denis Parkinson [email protected]
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
References• Exeter (2012). Online Coursework Management
Evaluationhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/assessmentandfeedback/ocme.aspx
• Glamorgan (2010). Turn it in or Turn it off? A pilot project for Turnitin and Grademark experience.http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/research-papers/item/turn-it-in-or-turn-it-off-a-pilot-project-for-turnitin-and-grademark-experience
Denis Parkinson & Stephen McKinnell
GradeMark for e-Marking and Feedback
References• Glamorgan (2012). The evaluation of Assessment
Diaries and GradeMark at the University of Glamorgan.http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/assessmentandfeedback/glamorgan.aspx
• Huddersfield (2013). EBEAM: Evaluating the Benefits of Electronic Assessment Managementhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/assessmentandfeedback/ebeam.aspx